Originally Posted by wildhawker
Usually is not never or always and almost universal is not unanimous. So it doesn't look like you disagree with wolfwood after all.
I believe you may be presenting a False Continuum. While there may surely be some exceptions to the rule here, it is absurd to ascribe them any great significance absent some evidence that oral arguments will carry an unusual weight in these cases.
As I said before, absent some tactical reason for not giving notice (as has been alleged to exist), it is my opinion that it should have been given. It is not however, a significant factor in either case.
Interestingly, the worst case scenario seems to have been achieved in the Richards case, where notice was given (possibly eliminating any theoretical tactical advantage), but the notice was materially deficient (possibly precluding compliance with rule 5.1).